I think they have some good commentators coming in, but I don't think the unit as a whole functions properly. It's like there is a domino effect in opinion. One of the ex-pro's invited as a guest will give their opinion, and more likely than not they will be interrupted by Barry McGuigan if he doesn't agree.
He talks over everyone, including the host Paul Dempsey. Whether he does it out of bad habit, bad manners, or simply because he believes his opinion should trump all others doesn't matter, it's really irritating when you're trying to follow what they're saying and McGuigan starts interrupting, then all the voices intermingle and you don't hear fornicate all.
The sad thing is that the ex-pros often get intimidated by him, or are 'walked over'. Either way, how many times have you saw someone end up saying 'yea, yea, yea' after McGuigan has said his piece, as they timidly agree with him. Even if he is the lead pundit, the producers really need to have a word with him about his conduct.
But the problem is more than just McGuigan, the panel as a whole never really functions as a forum. If you watch HBO coverage of boxing events, Larry Merchant, Foreman and Lampley never hold back with their opinions, and, more importantly, stick to their guns and make an attempt to argue their side. When have you ever heard Glenn McCrory disagree with Ian Darke? When have you ever heard Ian Darke disagree with Jim Watt?
Jim Watt... I'd be very interested if someone timed how long he was on the mic compared to Ian Darke, during DLH - Sturm. He makes up his mind on a certain point early on, and repeats it for the next 35~ minutes. Sometimes his insight is cutting and incisive, as when he picked up on Chavez's sore hand in the Morales fight. Other times, this technique is irritating and downright misleading.
He became so worked up due to DLH being in a close fight that he was blatantly ignoring his body-combos, and the way Sturm was constantly picked off with a counter-right inside. He rightly highlighted that DLH was constantly caught with a stiff jab and the occasional semi-solid shot. But what happened to balance? I imagined I was listening to Watt on the radio as I watched the fight, and I pictured it as a fornicating white-wash for Sturm, and that just simply was not the case.
It wasn't just Saturday night. In the Pacman - Marquez fight, he rightly (IMO) recognised that Marquez pulled it back. But I couldn't believe the way he ignored some of the shots Pacman was landing, okay it was the occasionaly solid left hand to Marquez's sweet counter-combos. But those punches of Pacman's were scoring punches, and again, if you listen to him without watching the fight you'd think it was a fornicating shut-out 120 - 106 for Marquez.
I think it's impossible by-default wishing for a commentary team that everyone likes, because of the subjective nature of 'commentary'. However, debate featuring differing opinions is lacking a tad in Sky's coverage, and while I can't stand some of the cheesy American commentators, the lone fact that they sometimes have conflicting opinions makes the coverage feel more rounded to me.
8)